“Jose and Niasia Cotto had no idea that their son’s death prompted an investigation by the FDA, until they were contacted by USA TODAY”

“The Cottos had long believed that Burzynski could have cured their son if only they had taken Josia to see him first, before giving him radiation and chemotherapy”

“They had even hoped to launch a non-profit, A Life for Josia Foundation, to help other children with cancer gain access to Burzynski’s treatment“

“Now, they don’t know what to think”
——————————————————————
So what good did Gorski do here, if any ?

1. He offers no opinion as to if he thinks Burzynski should have been responsible for advisingJose and Niasia Cotto that Josia Cotto’sdeath prompted an investigation by the FDA

2. He offers no opinion as to if he thinks the FDA should have been responsible for advisingJose and Niasia Cotto that Josia Cotto’sdeath prompted an investigation

3. He offers no opinion as to if he thinks Burzynski could have cured Jose and Niasia Cotto’s son, Josia Cotto’s if only they had been able to take Josia to Burzynski first

4. He offers no opinion as to what he thinks about the FDA requiring Josia Cotto to receive radiation and chemotherapy, and them failingJosia, before he was able to utilize antineoplaston therapy

Gorski might as well NOT even be here if all he’s going to do is repost the same thing USA TODAY published, yet “say” absolutely NOTHING

Personally, I think it’s has to do with what was said during the JulyTAM 2013 twaddle, when the female panelist made a comment about “people without BALLS”
——————————————————————
Since I have mine, here’s what I think:

1. If there was a moral or legal duty to advise Jose and Niasia Cotto that the passing of Josiaprompted an investigation by the FDA, then it was the FDA’s responsibility

2. I think that if the FDA was NOT requiring patients like Josia Cotto to 1st be failed by conventional treatments like surgery, radiation, and / or chemotherapy, there is a chance that Burzynski’santineoplaston therapy could be more effective because of:
======================================
What USA TODAY, Liz Szabo, Michael Stravato, Jerry Mosemak, and Robert HanashiroDID NOT TELL YOU ABOUT:
——————————————————————12/2002 Burzynski interview [3]
——————————————————————INTRAVENOUS
——————————————————————1. Treatment require strong commitment from patients as must be infused with Antineoplastons for many weeks or months ?
——————————————————————2. Perhaps 15% of patients taking intravenous infusions of Antineoplastons
——————————————————————3. Patients who have most advanced type of cancer will require heavy dosages
——————————————————————4. When give large dosages intravenously, have to watch fluid balance…and electrolyte balance
——————————————————————5. Intravenous infusion can deliver equivalent of 3,000 tablets a day
——————————————————————ORAL – CAPSULES OR TABLETS
——————————————————————1. Most patients taking oral formulations
——————————————————————2. Capsules or tablets
——————————————————————3. Limitation of how much medicine can take by mouth
——————————————————————4. 50 or 60 tablets a day pretty much all you can take by mouth
——————————————————————5. When give orally, see practically no side effects at all
——————————————————————6. Patients may develop skin rash, which may last for day or two
——————————————————————7. Don’t see any delayed toxicity once treatment stops
——————————————————————8. Everything practically goes back to normal within day or two
——————————————————————9. Doesn’t even come close to adverse reactions that experience with chemotherapy
——————————————————————FDA requirements
——————————————————————1. Most patients who come to us have received prior heavy radiation therapy, or chemotherapy
——————————————————————2. Usually die from complications from these treatments
——————————————————————3. Those who survive longest are patients who previously did not receive radiation therapy or chemotherapy
——————————————————————4. Longest survivor in this category is now reaching 15 years from time of diagnosis; and she’s in perfect health
——————————————————————12/10/1997 [4]
——————————————————————1. In addition to original family of Antineoplaston compounds

(the “Parental Generation”)
——————————————————————2. Development of 2nd generation of Antineoplastons

In cell culture experiments 2nd generation Antineoplastons developed have been shown to be at least

Thousand times more potent thenParental Generation
——————————————————————3. 3rd generation structurally altered Antineoplaston believe will exhibit markedly improved anticancer activity in human cancer cell lines resistant to
Parental Generation
—————————————————————12/2000 Egypt antineoplaston study [5]
——————————————————————4 newpiperidinedioneA10 analogssynthesized and tested on human breast cancer cell line against prototype A10 and anti cancer drug tamoxifen and DNA binding capacity of compounds evaluated against A10
——————————————————————“3B” and “3D” were several-fold more potent antiproliferative agents than A10 and tamoxifen and had significantly higher capacity to bind DNA than A10
—————————————————————10/1/2001 Egypt antineoplaston study [5]
——————————————————————Structural characterization of new antineoplaston (ANP) representatives
——————————————————————
Combination heat with pH modification had virtually no effect on obtained peaks, attesting to stability and purity of compounds
——————————————————————One had superior affinity to DNA than
prototype ANP-A10
======================================
So, what do we know from this interview with Burzynskifrom over a decade ago, his 12/10/1997 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filing and the antineoplaston research from Egypt ?
——————————————————————1. Oral (capsule and tablets): PRACTICALLY NO SIDE EFFECTS at all
——————————————————————2. Those who survive longest are patients who previously did NOT receive radiation therapy or chemotherapy
——————————————————————3. 2nd generation of Antineoplastons have been shown to be at least a THOUSAND TIMES MORE POTENT then Parental Generation
——————————————————————4. 3rd generation structurally altered Antineoplaston believe will exhibit markedly improved anticancer activity in human cancer cell lines resistant to Parental Generation
——————————————————————5. The research from Egypt shows promising results for binding to DNA
——————————————————————
I doubt Dr. Gorski will be blogging about the above, anytime soon, as it

DOES NOT FIT HIS NARRATIVE
======================================2000 – Thomas Navarro [3]
——————————————————————
What happened to Donna and Jim Navarro when they chose Burzynski’streatment over orthodox treatments ?
——————————————————————4 year oldThomas Navarrodiagnosed with medulloblastoma
——————————————————————Operated on
——————————————————————Tumor removed
——————————————————————Scheduled for radiation therapy
——————————————————————Parents knew he’d be damaged by radiation therapy
——————————————————————
Nobody his age survives this type of tumor anyway after radiation therapy
——————————————————————
Why they decided to go to Burzynski Clinic
——————————————————————Could NOT treat him because FDA requires failure of radiation therapy for such patients
——————————————————————Parents decided NOT to take any treatment
——————————————————————Burzynski asked FDA several times to allow administration of Antineoplastons, because already had successful treatments for some other children without any prior radiation
——————————————————————5/2001 – developed numerous tumors
——————————————————————Burzynski suggested to parents they should go for at least chemotherapy
——————————————————————
Went for chemotherapy to one of best centers in the country, Beth Israel Hospital in New York
——————————————————————Chemotherapy was successful, but he almost died from it
——————————————————————Severly affected his bone marrow
——————————————————————
Phone call from Thomas’s father telling Burzynski doctors thinking they won’t do anything else for him and Thomas will die within a week because of severe suppression of bone marrow
——————————————————————Burzynski encouraged father to do whatever possible because such patients may turn around
——————————————————————He turned around
——————————————————————
About month or two later developed 15 tumors in brain and spinal cord
——————————————————————
When close to death, nothing available, FDA called and allowed Burzynski to treat Thomas
——————————————————————Treated Thomas
——————————————————————Survived 6 months
——————————————————————Tumors had substantially decreased
——————————————————————11/2001 – ultimately died from pneumonia
——————————————————————
Perhaps professor and chairman of oncology at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Jan Buckner, professor and head of the division of bioethics at NYU Langone Medical Center, Arthur Caplan, chair of the Children’s Oncology Group, an NCI-supported research network that conducts clinical trials in pediatric cancer, pediatric oncologist and professor of pediatrics and pharmacology at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Peter Adamson, David H. Gorski, M.D., Ph.D., FACS, a/k/a GorskGeek, and “Orac”, ALL think that the 15 tumors Thomas Navarro had in his brain and spinal cord, which had substantially decreased under Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy, were because of Pseudoprogression a/k/a Pseudo-Progression (psPD) and / or pseudoresponse, caused bychemotherapy ?

Is this what they mean by:

“In reality, the tumor was just returning to its previous size” ?
======================================Dustin Kunnari [3]
——————————————————————
At 2 ½ years old, Dustin Kunnari had brain surgery
——————————————————————Surgery removed only 75% of tumor
——————————————————————
Dustin’s parents, Mariann and Jack, were told Dustinwould only live 6 months
——————————————————————
Chemotherapy and radiation may extend life slightly, but at very high cost in quality of life with very serious side effects
——————————————————————
Mariann and Jack decided to look into alternatives
——————————————————————
Found out about Antineoplastons
——————————————————————
After only 6 weeks of intravenous treatment, MRI showed he was cancer free
——————————————————————One year later another tumor appeared on MRI
——————————————————————
By this time Dr. Burzynski had developed more concentrated form of Antineoplastons
——————————————————————After 5 months tumor was gone
——————————————————————
remained cancer free ever since
——————————————————————Age 7 – taken off Antineoplastons
——————————————————————
To further complicate matters, oncologist kept threatening parents with a court proceeding to take Dustin away and force him to take Chemotherapy/Radiation treatment
——————————————————————
This continued for a year, even after success with Antineoplastons
——————————————————————Age 12 at time of 12/2002 interview
——————————————————————
Perhaps professor and chairman of oncology at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Jan Buckner, professor and head of the division of bioethics at NYU Langone Medical Center, Arthur Caplan, chair of the Children’s Oncology Group, an NCI-supported research network that conducts clinical trials in pediatric cancer, pediatric oncologist and professor of pediatrics and pharmacology at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Peter Adamson, David H. Gorski, M.D., Ph.D., FACS, a/k/a GorskGeek, and “Orac”, ALL think that the tumor David Kunnari had, which disappeared under Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy, were because of Pseudoprogression a/k/a Pseudo-Progression (psPD) and / or pseudoresponse, caused bysurgery ?

Is this what they mean by:

“In reality, the tumor was just returning to its previous size” ?
======================================Paul Leverett [3]
——————————————————————5/1999 – diagnosed with glioblastoma multiforme grade 4 brain stem tumor
——————————————————————Prognosis was would probably be dead before end of 1999
——————————————————————
Orthodox medicine gave him no hope of survival
——————————————————————Given maximum amount of radiation was capable of receiving
——————————————————————
Slowed tumors growth slightly, but didn’t alter prospects for survival at all
——————————————————————
After research on Internet learned about Dr. Burzynski’sAntineoplastons
——————————————————————9/1999 – began taking Antineoplastons intravenously, administered by wife Jennie
——————————————————————
After 6 weeks tumor had grown by only 2 %, Glioblastoma’s normally double in size every 2 weeks
——————————————————————12/2000 – PET scan confirmed complete remission
——————————————————————
Stayed on Antineoplastonsuntil 8/2001 to ensure tumor wouldn’t reoccur
——————————————————————
Just under 20% tumor necrosis remaining in brain stem, which is probably scar tissue
——————————————————————
Oncologist (at MD Anderson, Houston) initially wanted to show scan’s to his hospitals (MD Anderson) tumor review board
——————————————————————
for whaever reason, refused further contact and didn’t go ahead with it
——————————————————————
Perhaps professor and chairman of oncology at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Jan Buckner, professor and head of the division of bioethics at NYU Langone Medical Center, Arthur Caplan, chair of the Children’s Oncology Group, an NCI-supported research network that conducts clinical trials in pediatric cancer, pediatric oncologist and professor of pediatrics and pharmacology at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Peter Adamson, David H. Gorski, M.D., Ph.D., FACS, a/k/a GorskGeek, and “Orac”, ALL think that the glioblastoma multiforme grade 4 brain stem tumor Paul Leverett had, which disappeared under Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy, were because of Pseudoprogression a/k/a Pseudo-Progression (psPD) and / or pseudoresponse, caused by radiation ?

Is this what they mean by:

“In reality, the tumor was just returning to its previous size” ?
======================================Crystin Schiff [3]
—————————————————————–
Ric and Paula Schiff about torture their daughter Crystin had to endure during chemotherapy/radiation treatment
—————————————————————–Diagnosed with perhaps most malignant tumor known, rhabdoid tumor of the brain
—————————————————————–
Historically, there was no case of such a tumor ever having long response to chemotherapy or radiation therapy
—————————————————————–
Received extremely heavy doses of radiation therapy and chemotherapy, because nobody expected she would live longer than year or so
—————————————————————–
Was terribly damaged with this
—————————————————————–
Responded very well to Antineoplastons
—————————————————————–Complete response
——————————————————————Died from pneumonia
——————————————————————Immune system was wiped out, so when she aspirated some food, she died from it
—————————————————————–Autopsy revealed didn’t have any sign of malignancy
—————————————————————–
Particularly despicable story, because when Ric Schiff asked Dr. Michael Prados, then head of neuro-oncology at University of California at San Francisco Medical Center (UCSF), if he knew of any other treatment besides chemotherapy/radiation for Crystin’sbrain tumor, Prados replied in the negative

But a few years before, he had sent you 14 letters documenting effectiveness of Antineoplastons on Jeff Keller, another patient with brain cancer

Is this true?

Yes, Jeff Keller had extremely malignant brain tumor

had high-grade glioma of the brain; failed radiation therapy and additional treatments

responded extremely well to our treatment

was one of patients whose case was presented to NCI

there was no doubt about his response

Dr. Prados knew about it

If he was dealing with hopeless tumor like Crystin Schiff, why didn’t he call us?

Do you know why Prados did not tell them about Keller’ssuccess with your treatment?

It’s hard for me to tell

It happens that Dr. Prados and Dr. Friedman, who became boss of FDA, came from same medical school

they work closely together, and perhaps there is something to do with general action against us

It would be inconvenient for Dr. Prados to say that treatment works if FDA was trying to get rid of us and when his friend was Commissioner of FDA at that time

Perhaps that’s the connection….
—————————————————————–
Perhaps professor and chairman of oncology at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Jan Buckner, professor and head of the division of bioethics at NYU Langone Medical Center, Arthur Caplan, chair of the Children’s Oncology Group, an NCI-supported research network that conducts clinical trials in pediatric cancer, pediatric oncologist and professor of pediatrics and pharmacology at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Peter Adamson, David H. Gorski, M.D., Ph.D., FACS, a/k/a GorskGeek, and “Orac”, ALL think that the rhabdoid tumor of the brain Crystin Schiff had, which disappeared under Burzynski’s antineoplaston therapy, were because of Pseudoprogression a/k/a Pseudo-Progression (psPD) and / or pseudoresponse, caused by chemo and radiation ?